When did your opinion of Diana change and why?

[Lady-in-waiting25]

Hi everyone,

My opinion of diana has never changed. It must be a very difficult world to live in and I think that she coped with it as best as she could. After all, no one in the royal family is without their own faults. I really never thought that she was mentally ill or anything I mainly think that it was the stresses in her live and the lack of being able to live her life as if she was in a constantly protected cage.... That would do it for anyone!

[COUNTESS]

She did cause her sons pain. So did their father. They are now grown and not stupid. Their mother is dead and they love their father. Harry stood up for all the world to see and hear and declare that "she was the best mother in the world". He didn't have to say that, you could hear and see he meant it and his brother was in agreement and visibly moved. If you disliked her from the beginning, your opinion never changed and that is okay, but it limits discussion from if your opinion every varied or not. It didn't. Many can see that the Princess had many faults and many virtues.

[zhontella]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

You can't just label someone barking mad to stop them seeing their children. Tests would have had to be carried out, a psychological examination by a court appointed psychiatrist. Not on the hearsay of one or two friends, if that were the case the moment she started going to psychics and fortune tellers, custody would have been taken away.

Neither Charles or HM would have done that to the boys apart from anything else. I don't think they would have risk the public outcry either!

Psychiatry is not an exact science -- it is still in its infancy -- it's kind of like an art form. Psychiatrists can be as waffly as anyone else when it comes to a diagnosis. The only thing that protected Diana on this question was the risk of a public outcry. Why else do you think she went to all the trouble of airing the dirty royal linen in public?

[anbrida]

There is also a problem that some people would never believe what Diana said. I couldn't find a motive for Diana to told a lie about the friendship thing in 1991 or 1992. There was no people accusing her droping her friends at that time, not like now.

And how could we know whether Diana was in contact with her old school friends. Do you think the newspaper would be interested in that. They were just interested in Diana's scandals. If Diana went out with a male one day, definitely we would saw that in the newspaper tomorrow. But hanging out with old school female friends were not controversial at all.

Anyway, it is impossible to prove Diana didn't contact old school friends. To prove something doesn't exist is theoretically impossible. That is why we can believe God exists until now.

[cde]

Originally Posted by anbrida

There is also a problem that some people would never believe what Diana said.

I admit I find it hard to believe Diana's version of events. She did lie, omit pieces of information that would change the context of story and embellish. Her friends and family have outright said this. And it has always fascinated me how some of her fans treat what she said as gospel and that it happened exactly as she said. God forbid anything Charles said had to be a lie, since of course, he told a different version of events.

[COUNTESS]

I don't think, at times, either told the truth. They spit venom at one another. Each using their different camps. But sometimes, both told the truth. What difference does it make today. One lies in the ground and the other happily married and going on with his life. Nothing stands still. Life goes on.

[anbrida]

Originally Posted by cde

I admit I find it hard to believe Diana's version of events. She did lie, omit pieces of information that would change the context of story and embellish. Her friends and family have outright said this. And it has always fascinated me how some of her fans treat what she said as gospel and that it happened exactly as she said. God forbid anything Charles said had to be a lie, since of course, he told a different version of events.

Okay let's don't make the problem so big. Just go back to the topic. I used one quote of Diana about her friendship things. I know not all Diana said were true, but it doesn't make a particular words must be a lie. Can you tell me where comes the incentive Diana should lie on that?

[zhontella]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Really, do you have a link, an old article, anything to suggest that she kept in touch with old school friends, friends from finishing school?

This should mean something -- those she included in her will:

DIANA'S GODCHILDREN

Clare Cazalet, 18: Daughter of Diana's Norfolk childhood friend, Isabel, and her merchant banker husband Victor Cazalet. His late father, Peter, was the Queen Mother's racehorse trainer.

Camilla Straker, 17: Daughter of Old Etonian farmer Reuben Straker and Diana's pre-marriage flatmate, Sophie Kimball.

Leonora Lonsdale, 16: Daughter of merchant banker Jamie Lonsdale and his wife Laura, a schoolfriend and lady-in-waiting to Diana.

Antonia Twiston-Davies, 15: Daughter of Diana's old school friend, Caroline, and her husband, Audley, a Herefordshire landowner.

Jack Falkner, 14: Son of Col Simon Falkner of the Life Guards and another of Diana's old schoolfriends, the former Izzy McDowall.

Jack Bartholomew, 13: Son of Diana's former flatmate, Carolyn, and her husband, party organiser and brewery heir William.

Antonia Harrington, 11: Daughter of Jonathan and Suzy Harrington, an old schoolfriend of the Princess.

[jcbcode99]

All of these children are 11 plus years old--we have no idea about what their mother's relationships were with Diana--it could well be that Diana was still friendly with them at the times of the births, but later on kind of distanced herself from them. There really is no proof that either substantiates or refutes Diana's early relationships--I would like to think that she maintained some of her childhood friendships--it is a sad thing to read about her living this glamourous photographed existence and then heating up her meals in a microwave--its a little pathetic, really. I quite feel sorry for her--but she often talked about being lonely, etc....if she had maintained all these friendships perhaps she wouldn't have been lonely? I don't know--are there any interviews about Diana where talks about friends or interviews that show friends talking about Diana? I don't really know--but I do know that she had some patterns of behavior regarding friendships that cannot be overlooked when we talk about school chums...

[cde]

Originally Posted by anbrida

Okay let's don't make the problem so big. Just go back to the topic. I used one quote of Diana about her friendship things. I know not all Diana said were true, but it doesn't make a particular words must be a lie. Can you tell me where comes the incentive Diana should lie on that?

Actually I don't feel i am off topic since it is something about Diana that helped to change my opinion about her. I admit Charles wasn't perfect either but Diana IMO seemed to embellish or lie more often. I only quoted one part of your quote because my comment was more generalized about Diana.

[anbrida]

Originally Posted by jcbcode99

All of these children are 11 plus years old--we have no idea about what their mother's relationships were with Diana--it could well be that Diana was still friendly with them at the times of the births, but later on kind of distanced herself from them. There really is no proof that either substantiates or refutes Diana's early relationships--I would like to think that she maintained some of her childhood friendships--it is a sad thing to read about her living this glamourous photographed existence and then heating up her meals in a microwave--its a little pathetic, really. I quite feel sorry for her--but she often talked about being lonely, etc....if she had maintained all these friendships perhaps she wouldn't have been lonely? I don't know--are there any interviews about Diana where talks about friends or interviews that show friends talking about Diana? I don't really know--but I do know that she had some patterns of behavior regarding friendships that cannot be overlooked when we talk about school chums...

About the first possibility about the relationship to her god children's mother. It's very much a conjecture. possibly yes possibly not, this can be applied to every thing.

but the lonely thing was quite substantial fact. I will have another explanation. The "lonely" was more about the loneliness of family lives. And weekend is very much family time, I think Diana would have that kind of decency not to intrude her friends' family gathering. But I also heard that she was living on the telephone lines, she could called bunch of friends in several minutes. At least she had friends to take her calls, right? However I agreed her life was a very lonely one. I read that sometimes she would go to the hospital at 2 a.m. to check which patient could not fall sleep. Wow she must be very lonely at night, and did she has insomnia?

About interviews from her friends. I think there were already enough people who could not wait to go on the Tv to talk about her. Her true friends would not want to make it more noisy.

Just keep in mind that her life was quite different to our normal persons, in fact much more difficult than us. There were a lot of difficulties she had which we would never confront, and hence a lot of acts of her were different.

And I think the discussions about her friendships shoud be stopped here. By now I think all of us can reach a conclusion that no party can convinced another party on this topic. Everyone have their own Diana, but no one can declared his is more accurate.

Just do your conscience a favor, let her in peace.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by anbrida

Just do your conscience a favor, let her in peace.

Just a question: this is a forum designed to discuss Diana and that's what we do here. Why are you here and not doing your own conscience a favor to quote your words on letting her rest in peace?

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by anbrida

It is really naive to believe the newspaper or Charles' friends books would not exaggerate facts.

May I ask what you are basing your opinion on, if not books and newspaper articles?

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by zhontella

This should mean something -- those she included in her will:
DIANA'S GODCHILDREN

Just because she mentioned her godchildren in her will, doesn't mean a thing really. It does not show that she maintained a friendship with their parents, just that she continued a vague contact with the children and as I said in post 458, she was a good playmate to her friends children.

How many of these childhood friends have come forward to refute the suggestion that she dropped friends for no apparent reason and then turned up as if nothing had happened.

I don't know about anyone else on here, but if people were making such allegations about one of my friends, I would stand up and be counted in the defence!

[Charlotte1]

Originally Posted by zhontella

Last I knew her pre-marriage friends stayed in contact for many years.

There is evidence to show that Diana didn't maintain any long term friendships.

Sarah Ferguson was a friend from their teen years ( their mothers were friends at school) After Diana married they continued to see each other at least once a week. Sarah was the only non-family member to attend Diana's 21st celebration, (it's in the news articles of the day) so they must have been close, far closer than her former flatmates who weren't invited. Yet Diana cut Sarah off completely according to Sarah's sworn statement at the inquest TWO years before Diana died they had no verbal or physical contact. That means from 1995, therefore it wasn't Sarah's book, published in 1996 that caused the rift.

After making a point of standing by Carolyn Bartholomew at the time of the Morton book ( Carolyn was a school friend) Carolyn too by the mid 1990's was cut off.

James Colhurst who Diana used as a go-between with Morton was also a friend from her school years. He was cut off in 1995 after he also got tired of Diana's dramas and need to be the centre of attention.

Diana didn't keep in touch with her former flatmates after she was married, except for Carolyn and then she eventually was cut off.

One of the interesting things that's come out in the Inquest is that all the people Diana was close to at the end of her life, she hadn't actually known that long. Lucia she met in 1990, Lucia introduced her to Rosa Monckton in 1991, Annabel Goldsmith also around 1990. Simone Simmons in 1992 ( although she was cut off by June '97)

The fact that women that Diana went to school with asked her to be godmother is not a sign of continued closeness. One of her godsons was Carolyn Bartholomew's son and yet Diana still cut off contact.
Being chosen as a godparent wasn't necessarily a sign of closeness, Diana was godmother to Lord and Lady Romsey's youngest daughter Leonora, Diana was asked as a kindness by the Romsey's to try and make Diana feel included in Charles's circle of friends. Same with King Constantine, Diana was godmother to his youngest son Philippos, but she was never close to Constantine and his family.

[Charlotte1]

Originally Posted by zhontella

Psychiatry is not an exact science -- it is still in its infancy -- it's kind of like an art form. Psychiatrists can be as waffly as anyone else when it comes to a diagnosis. The only thing that protected Diana on this question was the risk of a public outcry. Why else do you think she went to all the trouble of airing the dirty royal linen in public?

I think mental health professionals would disagree with your statement that psychiatry is still in its infancy.

Diana went to air her dirty linen in public because she was a woman scorned and "heaven hath no fury like a woman scorned".

There was no threat of Diana ever loosing access to her sons and she well knew this as there already had been 2 divorces in the royal family and neither non-royal parent lost access.

Margaret and Anne also had marriages marked with infidelity, Margaret and Lord Snowdon both had affairs, both were cruel to one another and he eventually married his mistress. And yet no airing of dirty linen by either, no cooperation on tell all books, no 'war of the Snowdons'. Their children were at boarding school and spent equal time with both parents.
Anne too had a marriage marked by infidelity, both she and Mark had affairs. Like Margaret, hers coming to light made the split public and Anne eventually married her lover Tim Laurence. Again no airing of dirty laundry, no 'war of the Philipses' Equal access to both parents.
Sarah whose behaviour shall we say was less than exemplary once she and Andrew separated, none the less she had her daughters living with her fulltime, Andrew had access whenever he wanted. The girls always lived fulltime with Sarah, after the divorce she moved into Sunnyhill with them, for a number of years they all lived in the same house each with their own wing.

Anne, Mark Philips, Margaret and Lord Snowdon all of them were unfaithful, yet they managed to dissolve their marriages with grace and dignity. Something it seems Diana was incapable of, there was no question that she would loose access, as a precedent had been set before and she would have known that.

Finally the expression 'barking mad' does not mean insane or suffering from a mental illness. It's used as an idiom in the context of 'that person is an idiot' or affectionally "how stupid